2023-07-24
2047
#create react app#react
Andrew James
19505
Jul 24, 2023 ⋅ 7 min read

Creating multiple entry points in Create React App without ejecting

Andrew James Frontend Engineer @ Coinbase

Recent posts:

the replay march 18

The Replay (3/18/26): Hiring in the AI era, coding isn’t dead, and more

Discover what’s new in The Replay, LogRocket’s newsletter for dev and engineering leaders, in the March 18th issue.

Matt MacCormack
Mar 18, 2026 ⋅ 29 sec read
ken pickering ai hiring quote card

Thinking beats coding: How to hire the right engineers in the AI era

A CTO outlines his case for how leaders should prioritize complex thinking over framework knowledge when hiring engineers for the AI era.

Ken Pickering
Mar 18, 2026 ⋅ 4 min read

Exploring Vercel’s JSON Render: build dynamic UI from structured data

Build dynamic, AI-generated UI safely with Vercel’s JSON Render using structured JSON, validated components, and React.

Emmanuel John
Mar 17, 2026 ⋅ 11 min read

Stop wasting money on AI: 10 ways to cut token usage

Learn practical techniques to reduce token usage in LLM applications and build more cost-efficient, scalable AI systems.

Emmanuel John
Mar 16, 2026 ⋅ 8 min read
View all posts

12 Replies to "Creating multiple entry points in Create React App without ejecting"

  1. This could be used to dynamically import assets (images, logos, backgrounds, fonts..) and bundle only that are conditionally used? Or maybe there is a better way to do that? Thank you!

    I come from Angular 2-4 that has a angular-cli.json file, and you could define multiple asset paths to be included from a parameter input called “app” (in latest angular versions “project”) and in React, this is managed by Webpack but if you start with CRA and don’t want to eject.. it’s a bit cumbersome. And this could be a solution.

  2. You are right. I did some tries and tests, and seems that if you do an image or asset conditionally import goes well (it’s not included in the final bundle), but if you try to with a JS file, it’s including anyway to the bundle. So, I think this post needs to be updated..

  3. Thanks for this! I was under the impression that the dynamic import would tree-shake the unused imports.

    I should have some time next week to update the post

  4. Great concept. But as others have posted build process is including all files in project regardless of the dynamic import entry file. Have you found a workaround?

  5. I’m additionally having the issue that css files from the non-included containers are being bundled in, causing clashes between styles.

  6. Nice article Andrew.

    It led me to look into React.lazy as an alternative that renders a dynamic import as a regular component.

    I’m pretty sure the React.lazy approach would work here (wrapped in a React Suspense with fallback) and only bundle in the dynamic import. This will likely resolve the issue people are having in these comments where the bundle currently contains both files?

    I’m not sure if a code snippet will work in this comment, but I’ll try:

    const BuildTarget = React.lazy(() => import(`./${process.env.REACT_APP_BUILD_TARGET}`));

    Reference: https://reactjs.org/docs/code-splitting.html#reactlazy

  7. Thanks a lot for this! I had been searching all day for a “monorep” solution. However, I was unable to get your final solution to work as I was hitting a compile error with Sass that I could not resolve. Instead I modified the last step to just use a switch statement:

    // To add a new app, import it here…
    import ExampleReactApp from “./apps/example-react-app/App”;
    import ImsApp from “./apps/ims/App”;

    // …then add a line to the switch statement below, ensuring the “name” exactly matches the entry in the .env file
    let app;
    switch (process.env.REACT_APP_BUILD_TARGET) {
    case “ims”:
    app = ;
    break;
    default:
    app = ;
    break;
    }

    ReactDOM.render({app}, document.getElementById(“root”));

  8. thank you for the PR, does that mean when the name is explicit, the import can be target. Otherwise it’ll try to include all of them? I’ll give it a shot, but seems making perfect sense.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Would you be interested in joining LogRocket's developer community?

Join LogRocket’s Content Advisory Board. You’ll help inform the type of content we create and get access to exclusive meetups, social accreditation, and swag.

Sign up now